When sharing the Gospel, I begin with the "Romans Road to Salvation" verses: Romans 3:23; 6:23; 8:1; 10:9; 10:13
Getting people to see they are
lost is my beginning step towards setting them upon the path to being
found. This usually means some discussion may take place related to the fall of man in the Garden, and the dire state of all men as a consequent: sinners from birth, not merely becoming sinners from some neutral state when they sin after being born and/or at some sort of accountable age, and so on.
If in the discussion the topic of election comes up, I deal with it as I have here often, beginning with
all who call upon the name of the Lord will be saved. Those that do—a great multitude no man can number—are the elect. Those that do not are not the elect. In fact, they may never be the elect, if they never do what they are commanded to do.
As the discussion proceeds, I remind my interlocutor that election is
unto salvation; election is not salvation. In other words, at the appointed time the elect inevitably shall, of their own free will, call upon the name of the Lord and be saved. Election
unto salvation may take place in eternity, but the declarative judgment of God, one's justification, and imputation of Our Lord's righteousness to us, takes place at a time and place. Prior to that time, all elect remain under the wrath of God (Eph. 2:3).
If the conversation proceeds more deeply, I make a point to disabuse the person of the erroneous notion that
predestination means everything is cast in stone. This is a common error of many.
Predestination used in Scripture refers to God's setting His preference upon another, God's salvific love upon those He has chosen for reasons know only to Him and not for any foreseen merit of those He has chosen.
This corrective necessarily leads to a proper understanding of God's
foreknowledge, which is simply God's knowledge of all that happens. It is really not "fore" knowledge from God's perspective, for He sees all things
equally vividly, rather it is called
foreknowledge from our finite, temporal perspectives. God, I tell them,
knows these things because He has
decreed these things, that is, volitionally willed them. God has no unfulfilled desires, hence, what God wills cannot
not happen.
Furthermore and important is that
willing of God (
decreeing) included the act of God to establish the person's free will so that he or she may choose per their greatest inclinations when he or she so chooses.
At this point, examples help to solidify what has been stated are offered up in the discussion:
Foreknowledge is God's knowing that Peter will not refrain from sin.
Foreknowledge is not: if God knew Peter would sin, then Peter does not refrain from sinning. To claim that last statement is to make a logical error—the necessity of the consequent of the hypothetical—and to associate
foreknowledge with causation.
As to the decree of God, one could think of this going something like this:
"I, God, decree (ordain) that on {insert date and time here}, your grandson will—using his own the free will that I have so granted and established in him—choose a white shirt over a blue shirt."
And, for the very cynical and hostile person, I quickly forego the benign example above and get right to the heart of their hidden agenda:
"I, God, decree (ordain) that on {exact date known to God}, the Jews—using their own the free will that I have so granted and established in them—will take Jesus to Galgotha, scourging Him along the way, nail Him to a cross, torment and mock Him until He has died."
or, perhaps a significantly less horrific crime:
"I, God, decree (ordain) that Adolf Hitler—using his own the free will that I have so granted and established in him—will be the driving force leading to the unlawful killing of millions."
From there the discussion proceeds more animated and real learning is possible.
God's decree (basically His plan) is worked out in time via His
Providence (Prov. 15:3, Ps. 104:24, Ps. 145:17).
Providence is not creation, but a maintaining of what has been created.
Thus, providence is God's actions which upholds, directs, disposes, and governs all creatures, actions, and things, from the greatest to the least, to fall out according to the nature of secondary causes, either necessarily, freely, or contingently (Gen. 8:22, Jer. 31:35, Exod. 21:13, Deut. 19:5, I Kings 22:28, 34, Isa. 10:6-7).
God's ordinary providence relies upon means, that is, the ordinary manner in which second causes produce natural effects (what some call natural laws). Nevertheless, God may dispense with this ordinary manner and produce the effect in an extraordinary way, which is called extraordinary providence. In other words, God is free to work without, above, and against means, at His pleasure. All the miracles recorded in Scripture are examples of God's extraordinary providence.
In summary, the answer to your question is that I know of no Reformed or Calvinist that is hesitant to discuss any of the hard sayings of Scripture with another, believer or non-believer. In fact, I would welcome these sort of questions, for it signals to me that the person I am speaking to is serious about these matters and his eternal destiny, a signal that I might just be speaking with someone who will be later known as one of God's elect. So I had better be ready to give a defense, not just mere assertions or opinions, for that which I hold dear (1 Peter 3:15).
In all my years I can only recall maybe three instances where I had these sort of deeper discussions
face-to-face with a non-believer, beyond the usual
Romans Road, in circumstantial environments: waiting at the doc's office, standing in a long airport security check in line, and riding on a cross-country Greyhound bus. Of course, non-face-to-face communications like these take place often and no one here can claim I am hesitant to discuss them with all comers that are sincerely seeking to understand these things.
Have I answered your question sufficiently? If not, what can I do to correct the issue?
AMR
